Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 RELEASE THREAD

[Infinitron]

 

[Old Hans]

I've spent a lot of time on the internet since the 90's and ive never heard or seen the webby awards

 

[Swen]

I've spent a lot of time on the internet since the 90's and ive never heard or seen the webby awards

Almost as prestigious as the rpgcodex goty award.

 

[Swen]

https://www.gamefile.news/p/baldurs-gate-iii-interview-michael-douse


In a conversation with Game File, Larian’s head of publishing, Micheal Douse, shared that the studio probably won’t go public, even though the decision doesn’t necessarily fall on his shoulders. When asked about his thoughts on the current state of the game industry (everything is on fire, in case you missed it), Douse likened large, publicly held companies to an “oil [tanker]” that’s increasingly hard to steer. The strength of Larian, he says, is that they are “nimble and opportunistic,” allowing them to respond to challenges on the fly and pivot whenever necessary.

“We’re really lean and nimble and opportunistic, and I think we like to work with new data daily. None of the shit that we did in the publishing team was planned years in advance. And I think that’s also true for the development team. If you asked us what Baldur’s Gate III would look like, how much it would cost and how it would feel three years ago, I wouldn’t know…We’re just nimble. Being nimble is key. Big companies are not nimble.”

According to Douse, being nimble granted the studio the ability to make the game they wanted to make, which might not have been a reality if they were a public and much larger company. Now that they’ve found success with Baldur’s Gate 3, he says, they could go public and make a lot of money, “but it would be antithetical to the quality part of what we’re trying to do. So it wouldn’t make our games better. It would just make us rushed.”

 

[Desiderius]

Public in name only in the BlackRock/401K era in any event.

Maybe dial back the old opportunism a little lest you end up in the same place by another name.

 

[La vie sexuelle]

I've lost several hundred hours, mainly in Early Access. I played from the premiere, I stopped at the second act. So I started the second game, and again I stopped at the second act.

Any words of encouragement?

 

[Cryomancer]

I've lost several hundred hours, mainly in Early Access. I played from the premiere, I stopped at the second act. So I started the second game, and again I stopped at the second act.

Any words of encouragement?

Depends what you like in the game. I personally din't liked the first chapter but the second chapter was my favorite.

 

[La vie sexuelle]

I've lost several hundred hours, mainly in Early Access. I played from the premiere, I stopped at the second act. So I started the second game, and again I stopped at the second act.

Any words of encouragement?

Depends what you like in the game. I personally din't liked the first chapter but the second chapter was my favorite.

Interesting. Why? For me, in chapter two, the gameplay and the world start to diverge more and more from the plot. Normally this is not a problem for me, but here we have a very strong narrative emphasis, so it is obviously quite important.

In addition, Mithara's presence in the team is very strange, as if she lacked content and consistency.

 

[lvl 2 Blue Slime]

Just started a new playthrough, this time evil with my human Warlock Corzen, who I tried to make as stereotypically evil as I could.

 

[Cryomancer]

Interesting. Why?

Liked the idea of exploring a mysterious cursed land and everything that you can do only in a single tower.

 

[La vie sexuelle]

Interesting. Why?

Liked the idea of exploring a mysterious cursed land and everything that you can do only in a single tower.

Me too. But for me it feels...unmade. Especially Kethric's village story.

Just started a new playthrough, this time evil with my human Warlock Corzen, who I tried to make as stereotypically evil as I could.

Et c'est moi:

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Just started a new playthrough, this time evil with my human Warlock Corzen, who I tried to make as stereotypically evil as I could.

You forgot the eye patch and fancy hat

 

[Modron]

Just started a new playthrough, this time evil with my human Warlock Corzen, who I tried to make as stereotypically evil as I could.

You really made your character look like he fits into Larian's Baldur's Gate, I can see him telling you in conversation about being born a woman.

 

[Old Hans]

Just started a new playthrough, this time evil with my human Warlock Corzen, who I tried to make as stereotypically evil as I could.

You forgot the eye patch and fancy hat

which reminds me this game doesn't even let you have eye patches. the NPCs have all these cool armor sets and accessories, and the game is like "nah dude you're going to be wearing gear that looks like the same crap you bought at the opening of act 1"

 

[Desiderius]

I've lost several hundred hours, mainly in Early Access. I played from the premiere, I stopped at the second act. So I started the second game, and again I stopped at the second act.

Any words of encouragement?

Good choice

 

[ERYFKRAD]

I've lost several hundred hours, mainly in Early Access. I played from the premiere, I stopped at the second act. So I started the second game, and again I stopped at the second act.

Any words of encouragement?

Good choice

Lmao that's actually pretty encouraging

 

[Zerth]

I rolled a Seldarine drow intended to play as a swashbuckler with rapier in hand and dueling feat, I want to multiclass into rogue but Im finding hard to justify it since battlemaster fighter lvling has been pretty good so far. Hence im basically distancing from the intended archetype and end up with a plain fencer.

I think I've should tried bard with rapier proficiency....
Anyways, there's something Im disliking so far: that the narrative is conveyed in a spoonfed way, with the voiceover playing a redundant role while youre visually experiencing some event, or telling you which are the paths and choices you can make before picking your choices. Fortunately is not overly verbose, but I think the way BG3 handles the writing is inferior to crpgs such as Arcanum in that regards . Yet it's a long way ahead, maybe is too soon to judge.

 

[Desiderius]

These games are now designed to default to single-classing to reduce barriers to entry/replayability.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

These games are now designed to default to single-classing to reduce barriers to entry/replayability.

I am not exactly certain how multi-classing is a barrier to entry though. On that line I don't think even Pathfinder is designed around multi classing unless you are extremely fixated on absolute optimum gameplay.

 

[Desiderius]

These games are now designed to default to single-classing to reduce barriers to entry/replayability.

I am not exactly certain how multi-classing is a barrier to entry though. On that line I don't think even Pathfinder is designed around multi classing unless you are extremely fixated on absolute optimum gameplay.

Because getting the right mix in rulesets where it was rewarded was a laborious process and/or you had to look them up on Gamefaqs and you didn't really have enough info to evaluate your options. At least with Gamefaqs you usually had some autist who'd played the game in depth but now with Fextradeath et al you've got some ethical journoclown who plays a game a week and is talking out xir's ass.

Multiclassing... isn't really rewarded in these newer rulesets but grognards are set in their ways so keep beating their heads against that wall, usually fruitlessly. Time is better spent learning each class and how to get the most out of its development and mastering party dynamics.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

These games are now designed to default to single-classing to reduce barriers to entry/replayability.

I am not exactly certain how multi-classing is a barrier to entry though. On that line I don't think even Pathfinder is designed around multi classing unless you are extremely fixated on absolute optimum gameplay.

Because getting the right mix in rulesets where it was rewarded was a laborious process and/or you had to look them up on Gamefaqs and you didn't really have enough info to evaluate your options. At least with Gamefaqs you usually had some autist who'd played the game in depth but now with Fextradeath et al you've got some ethical journoclown who plays a game a week and is talking out xir's ass.

Multiclassing... isn't really rewarded in these newer rulesets but grognards are set in their ways so keep beating their heads against that wall, usually fruitlessly. Time is better spent learning each class and how to get the most out of its development and mastering party dynamics.

Alright dude. Never did like the concept of multiclassing myself anyway so carry on.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Multiclassing... isn't really rewarded in these newer rulesets but grognards are set in their ways so keep beating their heads against that wall, usually fruitlessly. Time is better spent learning each class and how to get the most out of its development and mastering party dynamics.

Multiclassing was broken by Advanced "Dungeons & Dragons 3rd edition", which allowed characters to take a level in another class upon level-up, rather than even restricting to proper multi-classing (or dual-classing). I suspect Larian implemented its own rule changes to make this worse than would otherwise exist in "Dungeons & Dragons 5th edition", but the problem with the new type of multi-classing still exists there even if not as severe as in "3rd edition". Anyone playing BG3 can conduct a quick search to find broken class/level combinations, and of course the game allows the player to endlessly respec the PC (and other party members) for a pittance of money.

 

[Haplo]

These games are now designed to default to single-classing to reduce barriers to entry/replayability.

I am not exactly certain how multi-classing is a barrier to entry though. On that line I don't think even Pathfinder is designed around multi classing unless you are extremely fixated on absolute optimum gameplay.

Because getting the right mix in rulesets where it was rewarded was a laborious process and/or you had to look them up on Gamefaqs and you didn't really have enough info to evaluate your options. At least with Gamefaqs you usually had some autist who'd played the game in depth but now with Fextradeath et al you've got some ethical journoclown who plays a game a week and is talking out xir's ass.

Multiclassing... isn't really rewarded in these newer rulesets but grognards are set in their ways so keep beating their heads against that wall, usually fruitlessly. Time is better spent learning each class and how to get the most out of its development and mastering party dynamics.

Eh, there are still low hanging fruits to be harvested.
Trouble is, none of them trumps the Extra Attack at level 5 (or 3rd level spells). So you're basically in Act 2 when multiclassing becomes viable. And late in this Act /early in Act 3 by the time it bears fruit.
Then there are strong benefits from starting with certain classes you might actually prefer to add later...

Basically the multiclassing system of BG3 heavily encourages frequent respeccing (which the game freely permits).
Single class is cleaner, has a more clear progression and is more orderly / doesn't feel dirty.

Edit: And is more then strong enough to finish the game.

 

[Orud]

Multiclassing was broken by Advanced "Dungeons & Dragons 3rd edition", which allowed characters to take a level in another class upon level-up, rather than even restricting to proper multi-classing (or dual-classing). I suspect Larian implemented its own rule changes to make this worse than would otherwise exist in "Dungeons & Dragons 5th edition", but the problem with the new type of multi-classing still exists there even if not as severe as in "3rd edition". Anyone playing BG3 can conduct a quick search to find broken class/level combinations, and of course the game allows the player to endlessly respec the PC (and other party members) for a pittance of money.

As I play more and more systems, the more and more I miss AD&D's multiclass/dual class systems. Am I crazy for really liking the way multi/dual class worked and that different classes had different experience curves?

These combinations felt like unique classes and playstyles. These freeform multiclass approaches feel ridiculous and promotes munchkin builds (even more). What in gods name is a lvl1 fighter/lvl1 cleric/lvl3 paladin/lvl 3 sorc/lvl4 barb/lvl3 rogue/lvl2 bard/lvl3 monk supposed to be anyway (apart from potentially a bad build)?

 

[Haplo]

Multiclassing was broken by Advanced "Dungeons & Dragons 3rd edition", which allowed characters to take a level in another class upon level-up, rather than even restricting to proper multi-classing (or dual-classing). I suspect Larian implemented its own rule changes to make this worse than would otherwise exist in "Dungeons & Dragons 5th edition", but the problem with the new type of multi-classing still exists there even if not as severe as in "3rd edition". Anyone playing BG3 can conduct a quick search to find broken class/level combinations, and of course the game allows the player to endlessly respec the PC (and other party members) for a pittance of money.

As I play more and more systems, the more and more I miss AD&D's multiclass/dual class systems. Am I crazy for really liking the way multi/dual class worked and that different classes had different experience curves?

Well, I wouldn't go that far.

But I did like the cleaner/simpler multiclassing system from Deadfire.